[dunnere]

Um, Jim Rice was inducted in 2009.

LOL. I guess I missed that...he was always my "go to" guy when it came to deriding the HoF voting. Was Ricky Henderson that year?

I sort of lose a bit of credibility on that, but the argument is the same.

I went out to grab the Bonds stats and didn't bother to look at the inductions. Mattingly isn't in, is he?

[alfredoleal2001]

LOL. I guess I missed that...he was always my "go to" guy when it came to deriding the HoF voting. Was Ricky Henderson that year?

I sort of lose a bit of credibility on that, but the argument is the same.

I went out to grab the Bonds stats and didn't bother to look at the inductions. Mattingly isn't in, is he?

Henderson went in 2009, and mattingly is still on the ballot far from being elected

[sesfan01]

I thought one of the interesting discussions was the case for Bonds and Clemens, since they are facing federal charges on perjury for lying about taking PEDs. It's one thing to have been rumored about taking steriods, but being accused of lying infront of a grand jury is another thing. We'll see how it plays out on the ballot next year. It should be very controversial.

[Sajman01]

Biggio, Morris, Bagwell, Raines.

That would be my ballot.

[azicet]

At this point, they should elect all these guys in the Hall. Otherwise, you'd risk an entire generation of baseball not being in the Hall of Fame. The Hall was built for the fans; for them to walk in and see the history of baseball, and to enjoy the memories of players they watched as kids. Without the fans, it's just a building with some old gloves, balls, bats & jerseys in it collecting dust. To not vote in the players they watched and cheered for is doing them a disservice. Cooperstown would lose fans, as well as business too, (the induction ceremony is a huge draw for the stores around the Hall. If nobody's elected, nobody's coming in & buying stuff).

Yes these guys used illegal PEDs & in the case of Bonds & Clemens, arrogantly didn't care what people thought about that or what the consequences would be. However, they're all still a part of baseball history. At the time, each of these guys was considered some of the best players of their generation. The Hall is supposed to represent the best players in the game. Plus you could argue that they still had to make contact with a 95 mph fastabll or in a pitcher's case, throw it past players who could drive it 500 feet. Nothing automatically made them do that.

If I was someone who had a say in voting, I'd elect each one based on their statistics, but put a note at the end of their plaques stating that they either used or were suspected of using PEDs. That way, they're still in the Hall based on their statistics, but they're forever labeled as players who possibly used something to get an unfair advantage, (and if you think about it, aren't guys like Gaylord Perry in the Hall who admitted they cheated throwing illegal spitballs? Players will always look to get an advantage. It's a way of life.)

[nolan5000]

At this point, they should elect all these guys in the Hall. Otherwise, you'd risk an entire generation of baseball not being in the Hall of Fame. The Hall was built for the fans; for them to walk in and see the history of baseball, and to enjoy the memories of players they watched as kids. Without the fans, it's just a building with some old gloves, balls, bats & jerseys in it collecting dust. To not vote in the players they watched and cheered for is doing them a disservice. Cooperstown would lose fans, as well as business too, (the induction ceremony is a huge draw for the stores around the Hall. If nobody's elected, nobody's coming in & buying stuff).

Yes these guys used illegal PEDs & in the case of Bonds & Clemens, arrogantly didn't care what people thought about that or what the consequences would be. However, they're all still a part of baseball history. At the time, each of these guys was considered some of the best players of their generation. The Hall is supposed to represent the best players in the game. Plus you could argue that they still had to make contact with a 95 mph fastabll or in a pitcher's case, throw it past players who could drive it 500 feet. Nothing automatically made them do that.

If I was someone who had a say in voting, I'd elect each one based on their statistics, but put a note at the end of their plaques stating that they either used or were suspected of using PEDs. That way, they're still in the Hall based on their statistics, but they're forever labeled as players who possibly used something to get an unfair advantage, (and if you think about it, aren't guys like Gaylord Perry in the Hall who admitted they cheated throwing illegal spitballs? Players will always look to get an advantage. It's a way of life.)

I couldn't DISAGREE more!!

[sesfan01]

At this point, they should elect all these guys in the Hall. Otherwise, you'd risk an entire generation of baseball not being in the Hall of Fame. The Hall was built for the fans; for them to walk in and see the history of baseball, and to enjoy the memories of players they watched as kids. Without the fans, it's just a building with some old gloves, balls, bats & jerseys in it collecting dust. To not vote in the players they watched and cheered for is doing them a disservice. Cooperstown would lose fans, as well as business too, (the induction ceremony is a huge draw for the stores around the Hall. If nobody's elected, nobody's coming in & buying stuff).

Yes these guys used illegal PEDs & in the case of Bonds & Clemens, arrogantly didn't care what people thought about that or what the consequences would be. However, they're all still a part of baseball history. At the time, each of these guys was considered some of the best players of their generation. The Hall is supposed to represent the best players in the game. Plus you could argue that they still had to make contact with a 95 mph fastabll or in a pitcher's case, throw it past players who could drive it 500 feet. Nothing automatically made them do that.

If I was someone who had a say in voting, I'd elect each one based on their statistics, but put a note at the end of their plaques stating that they either used or were suspected of using PEDs. That way, they're still in the Hall based on their statistics, but they're forever labeled as players who possibly used something to get an unfair advantage, (and if you think about it, aren't guys like Gaylord Perry in the Hall who admitted they cheated throwing illegal spitballs? Players will always look to get an advantage. It's a way of life.)

So basically what you're saying is let everyone in and the ones who used steroids put an * next to their name indicating that they cheated.

My dad and I have had that discussion before, and if you are basing getting in the hall purely on stats, you are not looking at the whole picture. There are other factors besides stats to getting into the hall.

And Gaylord Perry threw some spitballs, big deal. He didn't take roids or lied about it in front of a grand jury. I know players will always be looking for that extra advantage, but there's got to be some limits or boundaries on how far they take that advantage.

[rossmaute]

My problem with being so absolute about leaving PED users/suspects out of the hall is 50 years from now, there will be a whole era of baseball nearly wiped out of existence. I think the solution is to move forward and put things into context instead of just grinding to a halt. Since you can't know an unknown, there's absolutely no way you can make an accurate account of who was 'clean' or not for the last 20 years. You can't say 'if player A wasn't using, he would've hit 100 less homeruns' because player B might've been a pitcher using without suspicion. We can't know. The whole era is in question. Your choices are to leave EVERYONE out or vote in the context of the era.

[nolan5000]

So basically what you're saying is let everyone in and the ones who used steroids put an * next to their name indicating that they cheated.

My dad and I have had that discussion before, and if you are basing getting in the hall purely on stats, you are not looking at the whole picture. There are other factors besides stats to getting into the hall.

And Gaylord Perry threw some spitballs, big deal. He didn't take roids or lied about it in front of a grand jury. I know players will always be looking for that extra advantage, but there's got to be some limits or boundaries on how far they take that advantage.

I'm glad that you Agree with me.

[bustin 5 knots]

I'm really sick of the whole "even if you take steroids, you still have to hit the ball to get a home run" argument. How many times in a game are there flyouts to the warning track, where if the ball was hit 2 feet more it would go over the fence. PEDs give you that extra push, that extra 2 feet.